MALAYANDI KOVIL MALAR KUZHU 2024,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS, CHENNAI, CHENNAI
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
माननीय श्री मनु कुमार धिरर ,न्याधयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के सिक्ष
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1107/Chny/2025
Assessment Years: 2025-26
Malayandi kovil malar kuzhu 2024,
No.10 Lawsons Road,
Cantonment Trichy, Tiruchirapalli,
Cantonment S.O, Trichy,
Tamil Nadu-620 001. [PAN: AAJTM4407A]
Commissioner of Income
Tax
(Exemptions),
Chennai
(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)
(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by :
Mr.Lakshman.M, C.A.(Virtual)
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by :
Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
18.06.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
30.06.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chennai
[hereinafter “CIT(E)”] dated 27.02.2025 in rejecting the application in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”).
2. The assessee has filed an application dated 13.08.2024 in Form
No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(E) has issued show cause notice
ITA No.1107 /Chny/2025
Page - 2 - of 3
on 11.02.2025 as to why the application dated 13.08.2024 in Form
10AB should not be rejected. The assessee has not received the aforesaid notice through email, however the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application, as the assessee has failed to submit an explanation in response to the show cause notice holding it activities of the trust genuine.
3. The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application without assessee submitting reply to the show cause notice therefore, one more opportunity may be provided to substantiate his case before Ld.
CIT(E).
4. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of the Ld. CIT(E) .
5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(E), we find that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application in Form No.10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income-tax Act,
1961 as the assessee has failed to furnish any explanation of the show cause notice. The Ld. A.R has submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the application without providing an opportunity to the assessee as the assessee has not received any notice through email and, therefore it is requested that the case may be remanded back to ITA No.1107 /Chny/2025
Page - 3 - of 3
the Ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(E). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate this issue afresh in accordance with law. We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(E) on the date of hearing without fail and furnish complete details for his fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th , day of June, 2025 (अमिताभ शुक्ला)
( िनु कुिार गिरर)
( Amitabh Shukla )
( Manu Kumar Giri)
लेखा सदस्य / Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/ Judicial Member
चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 30th , June-2025. KB/-
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to:
1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent
3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT -
4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR
5. गार्ड फाईि/GF